Libertarian Ron Paul and his racism again

[reverendjeremiah]

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/4085...ent-page-1

I bet the Tea Party absolutely LOVES this Libertarian

You speak wisdom Asshole...you speak wisdom.

Twice-failed Presidential wannabe Ron Paul’s racism is never far from the surface and reappeared Friday when he admitted to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that he would not have voted for the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 if he had been in Congress at the time.

But Paul has a long and sordid history of hatred towards African-Americans — from his racist rants in his newsletters to his comments that clearly suggest a white supremacist attitude.

On June 4, 2004, while other members of Congress honored the 40th anniversary of the historic act, Paul stood on the floor of the House of Representatives and delivered a diatribe against integration, claiming it violated the Constitution “while diminishing individual freedoms.”

“The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society,” Paul declared.

Not a surprising statement from a man who is touted on white supremacist web sites as their candidate for President.

On his “Hardball” show Friday, Matthews responded to Paul when he said he wouldn’t have voted for the Civil Rights act:

I once knew a laundromat when I was in the Peace Corps training in Louisiana, in Baker, Louisiana. A laundromat had this sign on it in glaze, ‘whites only on the laundromat, just to use the laundromat machines. This was a local shop saying ‘no blacks allowed.’ You say that should be legal.

“That’s ancient history,” Paul said. “That’s over and done with.”

Sadly, it’s not ancient history as long as racists like Ron Paul continue to appear on the political scene. On the bright side, his racism is just one more reason why Ron Paul will never be President of the United States.

Personal Opinion: I wonder how he figures Austrian school economics into this? Is it BECAUSE of that Austrian school (which demands only the slightest government regulation on businesses) or not. Perhaps Void or Adrian could highlight how Austrian school has taken precautions to prevent racism and persecution in the market place and our economic society within its model. If you can, please use citations in your follow ups.

[DeistPaladin]

Actually, our history shows that market forces take care of the problem of racism and segregation. Just look at how the problem was solved without any government involvement at all.

Oh, wait...

[reverendjeremiah]

Funny how that "invisible hand of the market" suddenly holds up whites and smashes down blacks the less laws you have in place to correct that problem.

I have said it before, I will say it again with my foot held firmly down; "Freemarkets bring Slavery"

[Minimalist]

I wonder how he figures Austrian school economics into this?

Um...Hitler was Austrian. Seems perfect for a republicolibertarianazi.

[Tiberius]

Perhaps Void or Adrian could highlight how Austrian school has taken precautions to prevent racism and persecution in the market place and our economic society within its model. If you can, please use citations in your follow ups.

Free market economics doesn't have any precautions to prevent racism or persecution in the free market, just as it doesn't have any precautions to prevent ageism or sexism. What prevents these in a free market is consumer action. People who oppose sexism don't buy from corporations that are reported to have sexist policies; the same goes for racism, ageism, etc.

If the majority of the free market consumers oppose sexism, then you'll find a large majority of corporations trying to cut down on it in their workplaces. Why? So that they can maximize their profit by having access to a larger group of consumers.

Ron Paul is correct in that the issue is "over and done with". The vast majority of Americans (and indeed, the vast majority of most civilized Western countries) have a positive stance on issues such as racism, ageism, sexism, etc. You don't believe me? Look at all the racist marches you have, and all the opposition that march against them, or the anti-gay protests, and the opposition that march against them. Now imagine what would happen if someone opened a local store that had a "no blacks allowed" or "no gays allowed" policy. I highly doubt the shop would need the government to act against them; they'd be out of business within a week.

Of course, in actual racist communities, I don't see a problem with shops having a "no blacks allowed" policy. Why would anyone? The racists in the community don't mind it, and why would any black person want to work for a racist in the first place?

The issue of affirmative action was brought up in another thread, but I want to mention it here, as I am 100% opposed to such legislation. It is, in my eyes, not the correct way to go about getting rid of racism. What affirmative action does is simply turn racism on its head, and end up discriminating against whichever race is more dominant in the current society. If two men go for a job interview, 1 white and 1 black, then the better man (i.e. the one who is more qualified and is better suited for the job) should get the job. I don't care if that man is white or black; it shouldn't matter. What matters is when one of the men (be it black or white) gets the job because said company has a quota for his respective race. Hiring based on race is exactly what affirmative action is supposed to prevent, but in fact all it does is make it commonplace.

I'm against affirmative action not because I'm some kind of racist, but because I was brought up to believe that people should be treated equally, and affirmative action simply doesn't do that. I was against affirmative action even when I was a liberal, because whichever way you look at it, is is treating people based on the colour of their skin, and not (to borrow a phrase from the great Martin Luther King Jr) on the "content of their character".

[reverendjeremiah]

I cant help but notice a complete lack of citations in your reply adrian.

Free market economics doesn't have any precautions to prevent racism or persecution in the free market, just as it doesn't have any precautions to prevent ageism or sexism. What prevents these in a free market is consumer action. People who oppose sexism don't buy from corporations that are reported to have sexist policies; the same goes for racism, ageism, etc.

Of course it doesnt. Racism would be allowed, and if profit can be made from it, it will be made. But lets be honest (pulls out citation)

White American
223,553,265 [4]
72.4% of the total U.S. population in 2010
[4] - ^ 2010 United States Census statistics

So you are saying that "buying power" will ensure that racism doesnt thrive? Look at the number of White Americans. Look at the disparity of buying power in the black communities even WITH the anti-racism laws

You are aware that some corporations we have NO choice but to buy from them or suffer? Of course you do. Over here in my neck of America I have only one power company to buy from, and if I dont like it, then I go without power. Thats just ONE quick example.

If the majority of the free market consumers oppose sexism, then you'll find a large majority of corporations trying to cut down on it in their workplaces. Why? So that they can maximize their profit by having access to a larger group of consumers.

Because corporations arent out for profit at any possible way. They are out to pay attention to social injustices and to base their work force on such. All corporations treat their employees so well..honestly, are you even working? Look back to the Progressive period of America and tell me how much that buying power helped minorities back then.

Ron Paul is correct in that the issue is "over and done with". The vast majority of Americans (and indeed, the vast majority of most civilized Western countries) have a positive stance on issues such as racism, ageism, sexism, etc. You don't believe me? Look at all the racist marches you have, and all the opposition that march against them, or the anti-gay protests, and the opposition that march against them. Now imagine what would happen if someone opened a local store that had a "no blacks allowed" or "no gays allowed" policy. I highly doubt the shop would need the government to act against them; they'd be out of business within a week.

Ron Paul is a fucking racist moron who has very little connection to society. I work Construction, which also happens to be one of the biggest "jobs" in America employing many, MANY citizens and non-citizens alike. I will tell you right now that racism is STILL alive and well in the construction industry. I wish I had a dollar for every single white guy who let their racism slip in my presence so they can "feel me out" to see if I was one of "them". There is currently 7 white men on my job working with me. 4 of them have let me know proudly that they "hate niggers". One of them is my boss. This is a COMMON theme on the job for me.. that the racist whites outnumber (and look down upon) the non-racist whites by a huge margin.
You're a smart man Adrian..do the math and figure out those percentages, and how they will use their buying power if given the options YOU wouuld leave open to them.

Of course, in actual racist communities, I don't see a problem with shops having a "no blacks allowed" policy. Why would anyone? The racists in the community don't mind it, and why would any black person want to work for a racist in the first place?

My mental view of you has been blown away. I thought of you as smart and considerate, with a well grounding in reality. Did you think that maybe the minorities would work with a racist because he HAS TO. Not to mention you would also be leaving the door open for Atheists to be denied work, or to be fired on the spot. In fact, atheists would be the number one enemy of Americans. I would have to act like a fucking Christian and never let slip once that I was an atheist if your economic model was put into play. As far as the racists, I suppose that black guy could sell his house (obviously at a MAJOR loss since he was living in a racist community, and the racist majority dont buy "nigger houses") and move into some minority ghetto community where he can actually work and shop without being harrassed.

The issue of affirmative action was brought up in another thread, but I want to mention it here, as I am 100% opposed to such legislation. It is, in my eyes, not the correct way to go about getting rid of racism. What affirmative action does is simply turn racism on its head, and end up discriminating against whichever race is more dominant in the current society. If two men go for a job interview, 1 white and 1 black, then the better man (i.e. the one who is more qualified and is better suited for the job) should get the job. I don't care if that man is white or black; it shouldn't matter. What matters is when one of the men (be it black or white) gets the job because said company has a quota for his respective race. Hiring based on race is exactly what affirmative action is supposed to prevent, but in fact all it does is make it commonplace.

And if there wasnt such a law in place, then NO blacks would get hired, or just a small pinch of them. Think Im kidding? My wife works construction. Most construction companies dont like women employyes in the field because they have to have seperate rest rooms. We have caught more than one contractor trying to "skip over her", and when we brought it to their attention that we knew, suddenly they had a job for her. It doesnt matter that she can work well. Ive had some of my mechanics, when I was an appretice, tell me that they would NEVER work for a female boss, and that my wife was "stealing work" from struggling husbands, and that she didnt belong in the field. Your economic wishes would empower them and cost me and my family large amounts of legitimate income. And if they are allowed to fire us for our religion, then we would be even worse.

I'm against affirmative action not because I'm some kind of racist, but because I was brought up to believe that people should be treated equally, and affirmative action simply doesn't do that. I was against affirmative action even when I was a liberal, because whichever way you look at it, is is treating people based on the colour of their skin, and not (to borrow a phrase from the great Martin Luther King Jr) on the "content of their character".

I believe you when you say you are not a racist. I have not seen any racist intent in any of your posts. Im sure that you too can see that I have not a racist bone in my body as well, even though I like a good race joke, I take equality very serious. You would think you would be doing a good thing, or promoting freedom. In reality you would remove the barriers and not only screw many people over in the process, but your self as well. Your economic model would stifle your freedom of speech and belief (nihilistic atheists arent very popular these days in America). King also called for Economic justice, not just "content of character". King new that social freedom will NEVER happen unless economic Justice came about. Social issues and economic issues go hand in hand.

Perhaps you are idealistic, inexperienced, young, or a mix of some in that list. I have worked construction all up and down the East coast for 15 years. You say racism has faded out? I say you havent a clue what you are talking about, that you are more than likely blinded by your economic ideals, and through ignorance you would support the very means of destruction and persecution for the minorities (of which you and I are included) in America.

[Minimalist]

What prevents these in a free market is consumer action.

And your corporate heroes are making a concerted effort, by preventing class-action suits, forcing "arbitration of disputes" and trying to defund the new Consumer Protection Agency to make sure that "consumer action" can not get off the ground.

Really, Adrian, I am astonished that you are so gullible. These people do not want a level playing field....they want to OWN the fucking playing field and make everyone pay to get on it.

[reverendjeremiah]

What prevents these in a free market is consumer action.

And your corporate heroes are making a concerted effort, by preventing class-action suits, forcing "arbitration of disputes" and trying to defund the new Consumer Protection Agency to make sure that "consumer action" can not get off the ground.

Really, Adrian, I am astonished that you are so gullible. These people do not want a level playing field....they want to OWN the fucking playing field and make everyone pay to get on it.

I feel like Im banging my head into a wall again...you know...like when I was talking economics with Void.

[Faith No More]

Free market economics doesn't have any precautions to prevent racism or persecution in the free market, just as it doesn't have any precautions to prevent ageism or sexism. What prevents these in a free market is consumer action. People who oppose sexism don't buy from corporations that are reported to have sexist policies; the same goes for racism, ageism, etc.

Bullshit. You know how many times I've had to buy shit from Wal-Mart because they were the only ones who had something or the only ones I could afford to buy from? Consumer action cannot dictate social issues with these giant corporations that can afford to be racist and sexist because they know people will buy from them anyway.

The issue of affirmative action was brought up in another thread, but I want to mention it here, as I am 100% opposed to such legislation. It is, in my eyes, not the correct way to go about getting rid of racism. What affirmative action does is simply turn racism on its head, and end up discriminating against whichever race is more dominant in the current society. If two men go for a job interview, 1 white and 1 black, then the better man (i.e. the one who is more qualified and is better suited for the job) should get the job. I don't care if that man is white or black; it shouldn't matter. What matters is when one of the men (be it black or white) gets the job because said company has a quota for his respective race. Hiring based on race is exactly what affirmative action is supposed to prevent, but in fact all it does is make it commonplace.

I'm against affirmative action not because I'm some kind of racist, but because I was brought up to believe that people should be treated equally, and affirmative action simply doesn't do that. I was against affirmative action even when I was a liberal, because whichever way you look at it, is is treating people based on the colour of their skin, and not (to borrow a phrase from the great Martin Luther King Jr) on the "content of their character".

I agree affirmative action is not the correct way to get rid of racism but it is a way of leveling the playing field. Once it can be demonstrated that there is equal opportunity for everyone, then we can get rid of it.

[Jaysyn]

What prevents these in a free market is consumer action. People who oppose sexism don't buy from corporations that are reported to have sexist policies; the same goes for racism, ageism, etc.

And it doesn't work. Ageism, for example, is rampant in white-collar America. Most people don't know or care about what goes on inside of a given corporation. They only care about price.

We've already had an unfettered free market in the USA, it's the very reason that unions & regulations exist today.

I'm honestly curious Adrian, do you currently or have you ever actually worked for someone else in a day to day job for any length of time? Contracting single jobs / school projects don't count.

EDIT: Oh nevermind, I see that you did actually do some data entry for a whole year back in 2006.